What Risk Factors and Characteristics Are Associated With Late-presenting Dislocations of the Hip in Infants?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most infants with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) are diagnosed within the first 3 months of life. However, late-presenting DDH (defined as a diagnosis after 3 months of age) does occur and often results in more complex treatment and increased long-term complications. Specific risk factors involved in late-presenting DDH are poorly understood, and clearly defining an associated set of factors will aid in screening, detection, and prevention of this condition. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Using a multicenter database of patients with DDH, we sought to determine whether there were differences in (1) risk factors or (2) the nature of the dislocation (laterality and joint laxity) when comparing patients with early versus late presentation. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a multicenter database of patients with dislocated hips was conducted from 2010 to 2014. Baseline demographics for fetal presentation (cephalic/breech), birth presentation (vaginal/cesarean), birth weight, maternal age, maternal parity, gestational age, family history, and swaddling history of patients were compared among nine different sites for patients who were enrolled at age younger than 3 months and those enrolled between 3 and 18 months of age. A total of 392 patients were enrolled at baseline between 0 and 18 months of age with at least one dislocated hip. Of that group, 259 patients were younger than 3 months of age and 133 were 3 to 18 months of age. The proportion of patients with DDH who were enrolled and followed at the nine participating centers was 98%. RESULTS: A univariate/multivariate analysis was performed comparing key baseline demographics between early- and late-presenting patients. After controlling for relevant confounding variables, two variables were identified as risk factors for late-presenting DDH as compared with early-presenting: cephalic presentation at birth and swaddling history. Late-presenting patients were more likely to have had a cephalic presentation than early-presenting patients (88% [117 of 133] versus 65% [169 or 259]; odds ratio [OR], 5.366; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.44-11.78; p < 0.001). Additionally, late-presenting patients were more likely to have had a history of swaddling (40% [53 of 133] versus 25% [64 of 259]; OR, 2.053; 95% CI, 1.22-3.45; p = 0.0016). No difference was seen for sex (p = 0.63), birth presentation (p = 0.088), birth weight (p = 0.90), maternal age (p = 0.39), maternal parity (p = 0.54), gestational age (p = 0.42), or family history (p = 0.11) between the two groups. Late presenters were more likely to present with an irreducible dislocation than early presenters (56% [82 of 147 hips] versus 19% [63 of 333 hips]; OR, 5.407; 95% CI, 3.532-8.275; p < 0.001) and were less likely to have a bilateral dislocation (11% [14 of 133] versus 28% [73 of 259]; OR, 0.300; 95% CI, 0.162-0.555; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Those presenting with DDH after 3 months of age have fewer of the traditional risk factors for DDH (such as breech birth), which may explain the reason for a missed diagnosis at a younger age. In addition, swaddling history was more common in late-presenting infants. A high index of suspicion for DDH should be maintained for all infants, not just those with traditional risk factors for DDH. Further investigation is required to determine if swaddling is a risk factor for the development of hip dislocations in older infants. More rigorous examination into traditional screening methods should also be performed to determine whether current screening is sufficient and whether late-presenting dislocations are present early and missed or whether they develop over time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".